gender exam II

Johnson v. Transportation Agency (1987)

Affirmative Action for Women in a county transportation job Promoted Joyce over Johnson both qualified Did the Agency impermissibly take into account the sex of the applicants? Court affirmed the promotion procedures of the agency

California Federal Savings & Loan Association v. Guerra (1987)

Employers must grant a job-protected reasonable leave of absence for employees disabled by pregnancy Upon her return, was to be told that the person that she had trained was given the job. She filed suit alleging violations of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, which prohibited discrimination on the basis of pregnancy in employment.

Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. (1993)

Teresa Harris was sexually harassed by her employer. She filed suit in federal district court, claiming that the harassment created an "abusive work environment" in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The employer countered that the harassment had not been severe enough to seriously affect her psychologically or impair her ability to work, and that it therefore did not create an abusive work environment under the meaning of Title VII. Must sexual harassment "seriously affect [an employee's] psychological well being" in order to create an "abusive work environment" that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? No

Stevenson v. Stevenson (N.J. Super. Ct. 1998)

this case presents the question whether a final restraining order issued under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act, N.J.S.A. 2C:25-17 -33, must be dissolved in all cases where the plaintiff so requests. Wife was physically abused by her husband during a drunken rage. No. Restraining orders can only be dissolved by a court order. Even if a separated couple reconciles, the restraining order still is enforceable.

Arneault v. Arneault (W. Va. 2006)

Appellant wife appealed from an order of the circuit court affirming the family court's rulings, which divided the parties' martial estate 35/65 in favor of appellee husband, provided that certain stock should be valued at a discount and the wife paid that value over a 10-year period, and valued the oil and gas entities owned by the husband. The wife argued that the split should be 50/50 since the husband has not overcome the presumption of an equal division of the marital property. "yes"

General Electric Co. v. Gilbert (1976)

General Electric Co. offered its employees a disability plan for non-occupational sicknesses and accidents, but the plan did not cover disabilities from pregnancy. The respondents, a class of female employees of General Electric Company, sued their employer for sex discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The district court held that the plan violated the Act, and the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed.

American Booksellers Association, Inc. v. Hudnut (7th Cir. 1985)

Indianapolis enacted an ordinance drafted by Catharine MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin in 1984 defining "pornography" as a practice that discriminates against women. "Pornography" under the ordinance was the graphic sexually explicit subordination of women The court held that the ordinance's definition and prohibition of "pornography" was unconstitutional.

Cohen v. Brown University (1st Cir. 1996), cert. denied, (1997)

This is a class action lawsuit charging Brown University, its president, and its athletic director (collectively "Brown") with violating Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. Brown demoted these two women's teams, (gymnastics and volleyball) and apparently in an effort to comply with its understanding of Title IX's directives Brown University is in violation of Title IX.

Mississippi Univ. for Women (MUW) v. Hogan (1982)

Joe Hogan, a registered nurse and qualified applicant, was denied admission to the Mississippi University for Women School of Nursing's baccalaureate program on the basis of sex. Created by a state statute in 1884, MUW was the oldest state-supported all-female college in the United States. Did the state statute which prevented men from enrolling in MUW violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment? Yes

Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Servs., Inc. (1998)

Joseph Oncale, a male, filed a complaint against his employer, Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., alleging that he was sexually harassed by co-workers, in their workplace, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"). On appeal from a decision supporting a district court's ruling against Oncale, the Supreme Court granted certiorari. Does the prohibition against sex discrimination, set out in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, apply to same-sex sexual harassment? Yes

Troupe v. May Department Stores Co. (7th Circuit 1994)

Kimberly Hern Troupe, was employed by the Lord Taylor department store in Chicago as a saleswoman in the women's accessories department Unusual morning sickness made her miss work Fired because her manager didn't think she would come back after having her baby

Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County (1981)

Michael M., a 17 and 1/2 year-old male, was found guilty of violating California's "statutory rape" law. The law defined unlawful sexual intercourse as "an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a female not the wife of the perpetrator, where the female is under the age of 18 years." The statute thus made men alone criminally liable for such conduct. Michael M. challenged the constitutionality of the law. Did California's statutory rape law unconstitutionally discriminate on the basis of gender? No

Patricia Ann S. v. James Daniel S. (W. Va. 1993)

Patricia S. (plaintiff) and James S. (defendant) had two sons and a daughter. Patricia filed for divorce Patricia had been a kindergarten teacher but left her job when her first child was born. Children felt safer with father Children claimed that mother was abusive Father was granted custody of all children.

United States v. Virginia (1996)

The Virginia Military Institute (VMI) boasted a long and proud tradition as Virginia's only exclusively male public undergraduate higher learning institution. The United States brought suit against Virginia and VMI alleging that the school's male-only admissions policy was unconstitutional insofar as it violated the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause. No. In a 7-to-1 decision, the Court held that VMI's male-only admissions policy was unconstitutional.